Why doesn't God make himself known?

[dshix]

Yes, but apparently I’m not being clear.

God revealed himself to Adam and Eve in the Garden, they constituted all of Humanity. God revealing himself to them did not affect their free will. In fact it is the first case of free will being utilized. It is the linchpin for all discussions of free will.

So there has been a case where God revealed Himself to all humanity and their free will was not affected.

Funny, we’re getting back to Logic 101.

When an argument is flawed, it is usually because either the premises are false or the conclusion does not follow (non-sequitur.) Here, you are saying that since Adam and Eve consisted of all of Humanity, that means God revealed himself to all of humanity. This argument is false because the premise is false; Adam and Eve were NOT humanity, they were TWO PEOPLE.

To claim that since God had a personal relationship with the first two existing people means that he has made himself known to the entire world is ludicrous.

Do you not see that?

EDIT: Upon further reflection I see that you could mean that God’s personal relationship with Adam and Eve did not affect their free will. Actually, yes it did. They could not have decided to themselves that God does not exist, whether they wished to or not, because he was obviously there.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

Funny, we’re getting back to Logic 101.

When an argument is flawed, it is usually because either the premises are false or the conclusion does not follow (non-sequitur.) Here, you are saying that since Adam and Eve consisted of all of Humanity, that means God revealed himself to all of humanity. This argument is false because the premise is false; Adam and Eve were NOT humanity, they were TWO PEOPLE.

To claim that since God had a personal relationship with the first two existing people means that he has made himself known to the entire world is ludicrous.

Do you not see that?

EDIT: Upon further reflection I see that you could mean that God’s personal relationship with Adam and Eve did not affect their free will. Actually, yes it did. They could not have decided to themselves that God does not exist, whether they wished to or not, because he was obviously there.

At the time 2 people constituted all of humanity. They were the only humans.
2 people obviously doesn’t constitute all of Humanity now. They did use their free will to reject God and listen to the snake. So it wasn’t affected.

 

[dshix]

At the time 2 people constituted all of humanity. They were the only humans.
2 people obviously doesn’t constitute all of Humanity now. They did use their free will to reject God and listen to the snake. So it wasn’t affected.

You just changed the topic. We aren’t talking about free will to make decisions, but free will to believe in God at all.

Do you even understand the difference? This is becoming a circular conversation because you do not seem to understand what I am saying.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

You just changed the topic. We aren’t talking about free will to make decisions, but free will to believe in God at all.

Do you even understand the difference? This is becoming a circular conversation because you do not seem to understand what I am saying.

Yes I do understand. Free will constitutes the choice to serve or not serve, also it allows us to believe or not believe in the first place. You need to believe to serve but both come under the heading of free will. Free will us being used to believe or not believe, it is also used to serve or not serve. Free will doesn’t disappear if you have knowledge of God.

Also the original question was why doesn’t God appear like He did in the Old Testament. Free will was offered up as a “why”. My point is we have examples of people being face to face with God and disobeying. That is free will.

 

[dshix]

Yes I do understand. Free will constitutes the choice to serve or not serve, also it allows us to believe or not believe in the first place. You need to believe to serve but both come under the heading of free will. Free will us being used to believe or not believe, it is also used to serve or not serve. Free will doesn’t disappear if you have knowledge of God.

Also the original question was why doesn’t God appear like He did in the Old Testament. Free will was offered up as a “why”. My point is we have examples of people being face to face with God and disobeying. That is free will.

We are still not talking about the same thing. I am not talking about free will to make decisions, but free will to believe in God at all.

If God revealed himself to the world, the world would not have the choice to believe in him or not. Do you accept that fact or not?

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

We are still not talking about the same thing. I am not talking about free will to make decisions, but free will to believe in God at all.

If God revealed himself to the world, the world would not have the choice to believe in him or not. Do you accept that fact or not?

The choice to believe in God is Free Will.
The choice to serve is Free Will as well.

I do not accept your promise.

The Incarnation brought God to the Human world and yet the world is not wholly Christian. There were many that encountered Jesus and did not believe.

 

[cwltexas]

I know exactly what the Original Opening Post poster means, I think.

God spoke to Moses in the burning bush, while giving the 10 Commandments, God spoke to Prophets, God sent Angels to speak to people, DIRECTLY, in real world, real time.

Jesus and the Apostles performed miracles, as in, HERE IT IS, IN YOUR FACE, paralyzed people rising up and walking, blind people being given back their sight, turning the water into wine.

Do we have miracles today, absolutely, BUT NOT LIKE THAT, not explicit and direct and in your face and I don’t know about anyone else, but God or an Angel, TO MY KNOWLEDGE and RECOLLECTION, has never spoken to me.

Yes, there is a difference between then and now, no denying that.

 

[dshix]

The choice to believe in God is Free Will.
The choice to serve is Free Will as well.

I do not accept your promise.

The Incarnation brought God to the Human world and yet the world is not wholly Christian. There were many that encountered Jesus and did not believe.

The presence of Jesus in the world was not quite the “God revealing Himself” that I meant. I mean that if God REVEALED Himself, that is, made it impossible for anyone not to know he was there, He would be taking away the free will of man to believe in His existence.

The Jews which Jesus revealed himself to already believed in God, therefore they are irrelevant to this discussion.

If God were to reveal his existence to an atheist, that free will to believe or not believe in His existence would be taken away.

I believe I have stated this in the plainest words possible. If you change the subject yet again to something I am not talking about, and say that my premise is false because of something else that is wholly irrelevant to what I am saying, I will not try again.

 

[Regular_Atheist]

God is calling you to believe because of faith, not to be forced into belief by a miracle.

But I honestly couldn’t do that. At least, I couldn’t believe something in faith with any amount of sincerity. I would always have to admit that there was just as much chance of me being wrong as there was of me being correct.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

The presence of Jesus in the world was not quite the “God revealing Himself” that I meant. I mean that if God REVEALED Himself, that is, made it impossible for anyone not to know he was there, He would be taking away the free will of man to believe in His existence.

The Jews which Jesus revealed himself to already believed in God, therefore they are irrelevant to this discussion.

If God were to reveal his existence to an atheist, that free will to believe or not believe in His existence would be taken away.

I believe I have stated this in the plainest words possible. If you change the subject yet again to something I am not talking about, and say that my premise is false because of something else that is wholly irrelevant to what I am saying, I will not try again.

Did Pontius Pilate become a Christian? No. He stood before Jesus and was unconvinced. It is possible for someone to see God and be unmoved by it.

 

[ngill09]

The presence of Jesus in the world was not quite the “God revealing Himself” that I meant. I mean that if God REVEALED Himself, that is, made it impossible for anyone not to know he was there, He would be taking away the free will of man to believe in His existence.

The Jews which Jesus revealed himself to already believed in God, therefore they are irrelevant to this discussion.

If God were to reveal his existence to an atheist, that free will to believe or not believe in His existence would be taken away.

I believe I have stated this in the plainest words possible. If you change the subject yet again to something I am not talking about, and say that my premise is false because of something else that is wholly irrelevant to what I am saying, I will not try again.

I think your premise that people can choose to believe that something exists is a bit flawed. I don’t think people ever have much of a choice about what they believe exists. Either the evidence compels them or it doesn’t. Perhaps sometimes they can make themselves believe that something exists or doesn’t exist, but that’s literally “make-believe”.

Why is it so important that the truth be ambiguous so that there is a “choice” about whether to believe it or not? In criminal courts, should we avoid giving the jury evidence out of fear that if the evidence unambiguously points to a certain verdict, that we’d be infringing upon their free will? Why would God want people to make decisions on insufficient information?